Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

there is no engine built from scratch, there is an update to the RV engine though, that, afaik, has nothing to do with A3 anyways

thnx for the response, how does BI plan to bring out future games when they have hit a wall or very soon will with the current engine... :( you would figure that 3 years after the release of A3 and all the subsequent problems revolving around performance or lack there of that they have at least a road map for the replacement of the current engine...

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

thnx for the response, how does BI plan to bring out future games when they have hit a wall or very soon will with the current engine... :( you would figure that 3 years after the release of A3 and all the subsequent problems revolving around performance or lack there of that they have at least a road map for the replacement of the current engine...

i am pretty sure they do have that roadmap, but not to replace but to upgrade...In any case, afaik, the new enffusion engine is being injected one piece at a time into the development of dayz (and it actually make a lot of sense).

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

i am pretty sure they do have that roadmap, but not to replace but to upgrade...In any case, afaik, the new enffusion engine is being injected one piece at a time into the development of dayz (and it actually make a lot of sense).

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

i cannot comment on things that i don't know. What has been said on this subject:

1. Enfussion engine is an evolution of the current RV engine, with a lot of parts being re-written. It is NOT build from scratch, it is being developed around a set of specific tasks that it needs to perform

2. New tech is suppose to be in (speculation: deffered lighting and PBR shaders)

3. That video you showed has no relation whatsoever with the scope of ArmA's francise.

4. in any case, i for one wouldn't expect to see an upgrade to the current engine anytime soon, and if so, only on the future projects, not current ones.

2

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I dont know of any game engine which is truly "mutlicored"... even engines such as crysis which work in the same was as the RV core 0 API and AI , Core 1 volumetric cloud, core 2 phyx and water simulation, core 3 audio... what would rewriting a completely new engine solve if anything, it will just cause a massive head ache to the devs and to the community which will have to relearn everything from scratch more or less. people say that arma is unoptimized but when you ask them whats wrong they give an uneducated answer to why "such as in <name of open world / Fps game here> i get 120 fps Ultra"

first thing is, Arma has a view distance which is 6.6 times larger then the maps in games such as battlefailed 3.

2nd every single Ai is being tracked in real time not only in the view distance of a player, this also applies somewhat to ever single object over 1 million around the island if you knock down a tree and come back to that tree in an hour it will still be knocked down.

3rd every single round is calculated even the ones that you do not see. they all change angles and velocitys during flight and can bounce off of objects or the ground.

all in all, what im trying to say without typing a damn book is that Arma is a game which does things which has no comparison to be made in its class. (and before someone says something no Dcs, il-2, x planes ect is not in the same class)

4th people play on cancerous gamemodes such as king of the hill, domination, life, day z and what ever is on the band wagon.... all these gamemodes are not well optimized, they are filled with tons of objects, tons of scripts and tons of ai... and to put more salt upon the wounds they are not even being run on good servers or they are running without a headless client server.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

When you understand algorithms and data structures, you'll appreciate how good the current engine actually is.

do you think a 4 engine bomber fly's better on just 2 of the engines? maximum speed will be obtained when all 4 engines are working. Are you saying the RV engine use's Distributed algorithm

I dont know of any game engine which is truly ? "mutlicored"... even engines such as crysis which work in the same was as the RV core 0 API and AI , Core 1 volumetric cloud, core 2 phyx and water simulation, core 3 audio... what would rewriting a completely new engine solve if anything, it will just cause a massive head ache to the devs and to the community which will have to relearn everything from scratch more or less. people say that arma is unoptimized but when you ask them whats wrong they give an uneducated answer to why "such as in <name of open world / Fps game here> i get 120 fps Ultra"

first thing is, Arma has a view distance which is 6.6 times larger then the maps in games such as battlefailed 3.

2nd every single Ai is being tracked in real time not only in the view distance of a player, this also applies somewhat to ever single object over 1 million around the island if you knock down a tree and come back to that tree in an hour it will still be knocked down.

3rd every single round is calculated even the ones that you do not see. they all change angles and velocitys during flight and can bounce off of objects or the ground.

all in all, what im trying to say without typing a damn book is that Arma is a game which does things which has no comparison to be made in its class. (and before someone says something no Dcs, il-2, x planes ect is not in the same class)

4th people play on cancerous gamemodes such as king of the hill, domination, life, day z and what ever is on the band wagon.... all these gamemodes are not well optimized, they are filled with tons of objects, tons of scripts and tons of ai... and to put more salt upon the wounds they are not even being run on good servers or they are running without a headless client server.

What a game engine is doing is irrelevant when you find out it is not effectively using all available resource (cores) .

"Evolution according to Amdahl's law of the theoretical speedup in latency of the execution of a program in function of the number of processors executing it, for different values of p. The speedup is limited by the serial part of the program. For example, if 95% of the program can be parallelized, the theoretical maximum speedup using parallel computing would be 20 times."

Thnx for the responses I got the answer I was looking for, no need for further discussion.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

do you think a 4 engine bomber fly's better on just 2 of the engines? maximum speed will be obtained when all 4 engines are working. Are you saying the RV engine use's Distributed algorithm

What a game engine is doing is irrelevant when you find out it is not effectively using all available resource (cores) .

"Evolution according to Amdahl's law of the theoretical speedup in latency of the execution of a program in function of the number of processors executing it, for different values of p. The speedup is limited by the serial part of the program. For example, if 95% of the program can be parallelized, the theoretical maximum speedup using parallel computing would be 20 times."

Thnx for the responses I got the answer I was looking for, no need for further discussion.

-

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

why does a system need to use more resources when it would make no use of it anyway, please explain. because I see comment such as "oh Arma 3 should be made in 64 bit" when the game does not even use more then 3 to 3.5 gb of ram... what use would it be to have a cpu running at close to 100% if core 0 is doing all the work and the other cores doing the less important task this is the reason why the game struggles its because that single core is doing almost all the work, reason being is that there is literary no way around it you cant have the other cores sharing core 0 work load it will hurt latency. until the day someone can make a code which allows true mulitcore in video games thats the key word in video games without latency issues that is the day we will see Arma running just as good a much less demanding games much like battlefailed and Call of duty. i think that Dx 12 will help somewhat with Arma 3 smoothing out stutters and lag when moving at very high speeds or environments which are very dense in detail.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

why does a system need to use more resources when it would make no use of it anyway, please explain. because I see comment such as "oh Arma 3 should be made in 64 bit" when the game does not even use more then 3 to 3.5 gb of ram... what use would it be to have a cpu running at close to 100% if core 0 is doing all the work and the other cores doing the less important task this is the reason why the game struggles its because that single core is doing almost all the work, reason being is that there is literary no way around it you cant have the other cores sharing core 0 work load it will hurt latency. until the day someone can make a code which allows true mulitcore in video games thats the key word in video games without latency issues that is the day we will see Arma running just as good a much less demanding games much like battlefailed and Call of duty. i think that Dx 12 will help somewhat with Arma 3 smoothing out stutters and lag when moving at very high speeds or environments which are very dense in detail.

i doubt DX12 would improve performance dramatically. I think the main thing that would improve, would be a drastic change in terms of how the engine loads textures and buffers them.

Link to post

Share on other sites

i doubt DX12 would improve performance dramatically. I think the main thing that would improve, would be a drastic change in terms of how the engine loads textures and buffers them.

as I said it will help with dense areas filled with models which have a high polygon count, and it will help with rendering which Dx 12 is so much better at doing then dx 11 about 200% or higher, it also reduces Cpu overhead so the cpu has a workload which is shared across multiple cores instead of just core 0 which will help arma 3 no doubt.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

i cannot comment on things that i don't know. What has been said on this subject:

1. Enfussion engine is an evolution of the current RV engine, with a lot of parts being re-written. It is NOT build from scratch, it is being developed around a set of specific tasks that it needs to perform

2. New tech is suppose to be in (speculation: deffered lighting and PBR shaders)

3. That video you showed has no relation whatsoever with the scope of ArmA's francise.

4. in any case, i for one wouldn't expect to see an upgrade to the current engine anytime soon, and if so, only on the future projects, not current ones.

Please don't spread misinformation when you don't have any clue about our work (which you actually stated yourself).

Enfusion is NOT an evolution of the RV engine, ALL the parts of the new, modular Enfusion engine are being written from scratch, with the intention to serve as a tech basis for ANY kind of game, therefore not serving only a specific purpose. DayZ is implementing the modules one by one as they become available, while working with some legacy modules from RV (which is why DayZ is subjectively taking such a long time to be developed, because it solves complex technical/compatibility issues).

The one thing that you stated correctly is the fact that (with the exception of DayZ) we will use the Enfusion engine for our future projects.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Please don't spread misinformation when you don't have any clue about our work (which you actually stated yourself).

Enfusion is NOT an evolution of the RV engine, ALL the parts of the new, modular Enfusion engine are being written from scratch, with the intention to serve as a tech basis for ANY kind of game, therefore not serving only a specific purpose. DayZ is implementing the modules one by one as they become available, while working with some legacy modules from RV (which is why DayZ is subjectively taking such a long time to be developed, because it solves complex technical/compatibility issues).

The one thing that you stated correctly is the fact that (with the exception of DayZ) we will use the Enfusion engine for our future projects.

thank you for this information it's very encouraging to hear that you are making a new engine :):) I was working on a project that involved many large structures using in-game objects so there would no mod to download, however performance issues made me stop :( there were to be several of these types of castles of different sizes and shapes over the map but just one of them (like in the picture) crippled the server :(, I really hope there is an A4 in the furture using the new engine.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Enfusion is NOT an evolution of the RV engine, ALL the parts of the new, modular Enfusion engine are being written from scratch, with the intention to serve as a tech basis for ANY kind of game, therefore not serving only a specific purpose.

Is that really true? I was under the impression that it was a rebuilt RV3 engine.

Oh well, as long as it can handle an Arma as well as or better than RV4, I'm happy :)

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Please don't spread misinformation when you don't have any clue about our work (which you actually stated yourself).

Enfusion is NOT an evolution of the RV engine, ALL the parts of the new, modular Enfusion engine are being written from scratch, with the intention to serve as a tech basis for ANY kind of game, therefore not serving only a specific purpose. DayZ is implementing the modules one by one as they become available, while working with some legacy modules from RV (which is why DayZ is subjectively taking such a long time to be developed, because it solves complex technical/compatibility issues).

The one thing that you stated correctly is the fact that (with the exception of DayZ) we will use the Enfusion engine for our future projects.

how different is the Enfusion engine compared to RV in terms of creating content in future arma titles for us community members? will there be a slight re-education process or will we need to start over, will oxygen be the standerd will the scripting/syntex be done in the same manner? i know this has probably been said before on the some page. also can I haz t72 please :P

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

how different is the Enfusion engine compared to RV in terms of creating content in future arma titles for us community members? will there be a slight re-education process or will we need to start over, will oxygen be the standerd will the scripting/syntex be done in the same manner? i know this has probably been said before on the some page. also can I haz t72 please :P

Unfortunately the first hints we'll get re: modding for Enfusion will probably be once the DayZ devs unveil what mod support in their own game is supposed to be like, but based on the references to Enforce I imagine that you can fuel your own speculation with a glimpse at Take On Mars and its modding pipeline.

I know two claimed aspirations by then-lead producer/now-creative director Brian Hicks from 2015 for engine changes that would be relevant to a modding pipeline/workflow, but one of them was walked back (he seemed pessimistic about the possibility of complete replacement/removal) and the other I haven't heard of in months... although that second one was the last time I heard official word re: modding in DayZ standalone anyway.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

It's a bit too early to talk about modding, our dev teams are now in the middle of researching different ways how modding is done across the industry and picking the best examples. One major change will be the new EnForce scripting language, this is something that's tied with how scripting is managed on the engine level, and as the name suggests, it'll be really close to what you can do with the Enforce engine (it's similar to standard scripting languages in the industry: faster, cleaner and more powerful).

As chortles said, following DayZ development is the best way to start learning about our new engine - but don't get too scared by the word "learning", I think we all know at Bohemia that we will have a huge legacy in the RV modding when we fully switch to Enfusion with our future games, so it won't be a completely fresh start for those who have been creating content for our games since OFP days :)

2

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

As chortles said, following DayZ development is the best way to start learning about our new engine - but don't get too scared by the word "learning", I think we all know at Bohemia that we will have a huge legacy in the RV modding when we fully switch to Enfusion with our future games, so it won't be a completely fresh start for those who have been creating content for our games since OFP days :)

Varies by the content though, I'm sure... for example modelers' skills outside of Oxygen/Object Builder I'm sure will be no worse off, though if the aspiration of just outright using a non-proprietary-to-Bohemia format isn't achievable, then at least something akin to Take On Mars' FBX to TXO converter? However, I imagine that we can pretty much throw out all our knowledge of SQF when it comes to bringing a mod from Arma 3 to an Enfusion-powered game, even if it is in favor of a "faster, cleaner and more powerful" Enforce Script.